This year, similar to the past couple of seasons, is very tricky when it comes to who belongs in the Hall of Fame. With players being held out do to steroid implication, the question asked about every newly eligible player is: Were they using? Many have either admitted it while others have been ratted out or simply fail to admit the obvious. My opinion on the HOF is that players should be held out for using PEDs throughout their playing career. Its not fair to the legends who played the game fairly, without a performance advantage. However, while it is safe to say many players from the 1980s into the early 2000s (and even today- ask Ryan Braun) have used, it is not fair to say they all have used. Enough evidence has been obtained for the fans and the writers as to which players should not be considered based on the use of PEDs. So, to blackball any "big" player just because they played in the "steroid" era is not fair. But it is being done and will be done over the next couple of years. Jeff Bagwell has not been linked to the use of steroids. There is suspicion though, and that may be enough to keep him out of the hall. Mike Piazza, for the exception of Murray Chauss reporting about him having back acne, (which was proven to have nothing to do with steroid use) has not been implicated. He may be held out of the hall as well, just because of his size and because he player in this era. Jim Thome played on the Cleveland Indians teams of the mid nineties, known to have users like Manny Ramirez, Albert Belle and perhaps even Sandy Alomar. Thome was a big player who hit a lot of homeruns so I'm sure some will question him as well. I don't think its fair. We live in a society where information is available at our fingertips. If proof is out there that these players were abusing steroids, we would know by now. (At least they would be mentioned in one of Jose Canseco's books.) Because of the steroids, the HOF is getting watered down. Players like Goose Gossage, Bert Blyleven, Andre Dawson, Jim Rice and Bruce Sutter were exceptional players. But are they Hall of Famers? Would they have made it if other player's credibility weren't destroyed over the steroid era? If I had a vote this year, I would vote for Barry Larkin, who is almost a shoe-in to be voted in this year. Based on what I said before, I'd also vote for Bagwell because he has HOF numbers and there has been no proof that he did steroids. He will get a considerable amount of votes. Jack Morris, as I have stated before, falls short of being a Hall of Famer, but Blyleven getting in will make more writers consider Morris. Juan Gonzalez has HOF numbers, but there is enough suspicion that he was using PEDs. Guys like Tim Raines, Edgar Martinez, Larry Walker, Dale Murphy and Don Mattingly will continue to get votes, but none are HOF worthy in my opinion. And of course it will be interesting if Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro will get more or less votes this year, my guess is less. Ron Santo was a very good player and I'm glad he is going in. Like I said, I would join him with Larkin and Bagwell, two symbols of the generation that I saw from start to finish. Both players started and ended their playing careers with the same team, which doesn't happen anymore. Most importantly, both are worthy based on their stats and what they did for the game as players. Hopefully in the next couple of years we can see Gil Hodges finally get his moment while his wife is still alive.

My votes would go to:
Tim Raines, who was so consistent year in and year out and never got noticed.
Jeff Bagwell could do it all. Hit, hit for power, steal bases and was always among the leaders in feilding pct. at his position.
Alan Trammell had similar numbers to Barry Larkin. Barry will get in, but Alan will get in this year, in my opinion.

Thanks for the feedback Bob. I think Larkin will get in without a doubt. Bagwell has a good chance, and gets my vote.
Raines was a premier leadoff man and would have stood out more if he didn't play the in the same era as Rickey Henderson. The beginning of Raines career mirrored a young Lou Brock. Unfortunately, he spent his last several seasons as a back up player which I think hurt his chances. If the level of comparison of a player like Raines is Henderson and Brock, he falls short IMO. Both Henderson and Brock had over 3000 hits and when each of them retired, they held the all time record for stolen bases. But, I would not object if Raines made it.
Trammell was a tremendous leader and fit the bill as the type of top shortstop that was typical before the likes of Larkin and Cal Ripken changed the perception what was expected from a shortstop. Though Trammell was a very good defensive SS, he was never in the same class as an Ozzie Smith or Luis Aparacio. I see Trammell maintaining enough votes to remain on the ballots for his 15 years of eligibility but 75% is a lot to ask for. I can see him getting voted in years later by the veterans committee.